SBPWG:Meetings/Sept 15 2011

Home        About        Members        Meetings        Gaps        Discussion        Resources       

Meeting Notes: Sept 15 2011

Thursday Sept 15th 6:30-8:30pm

UCSF Byers Hall Room 313

Agenda

0. Welcome, Introductions, News

1. Film Viewing and Discussion

2. Bay Area Science Festival Update

3. Syn Bio Practices Leadership Bootcamp/Workshop Discussion & Planning

Attendees

• Megan Palmer (Stanford)
• Ryan Ritterson (UCSF)
• Mike Fisher (Berkeley)
• Danielle Tullman-Ercek (Berkeley)
• Jay Vowles (Stanford)
• Connie Eaves (UCSF)
• Veronica Zepeda (UCSF)
• John Cumbers (NASA/Brown)
• Andy Chang (Stanford)
• Josh Wolf (UCSF)
• Sara Aguiton (Stanford)

Film

Hypothetical Risk: The Cambridge City Council Hearings on Recombinant DNA Research

[Video Link]

This fascinating video, recorded in 1976, occurs three years after the scientific community raised concern about the safety of recombinant DNA experiments and one month after the NIH issued guidelines to regulate recombinant DNA work. The cambridge city council is meeting with scientists (including Maxine Singer, Mark Ptashne and Jon King) to discuss consequences of the guidelines for the community and surrounding laboratories and to consider additional resolutions and actions the city might take to ensure the safety of its citizens. We are planning to use this footage for a new film project on biological safety/risk, so your comments will be very helpful!

Discussion and Feedback

General Discussion

• No one had previously seen the films; only a few were aware of these hearings.
• The same questions are still being asked today!
• Jon King was clearly the most prepared, and was able to appeal to emotions . He made some very convincing statements in contradiction of Mark and Maxine's claims.
• Mark, in particular, comes off as the arrogant scientist.
• Interesting that it is not until the moratorium is proposed that Mark highlights the potential beneficial research that could result, instead of just discussing risks.
• It was asked whether the science/society groups mentioned by Jon King still existed today and in what forms? E.g. Jon Beckwith still runs genetics and society group.
• Interesting that despite Jon and Ruth's statement, the final decision was actually not particularly rash and fairly rational, especially if you put consider the lay audience's background. Responded to the particular criticisms mounted by jon king - need to have element of local decision making (i.e. local rep on IRBs); need to have better epidemiological screening.
• Noted by some members that it is clear that self-regulation is not satisfactory, even to them. However, there is a level of technical knowledge required in order to craft meaningful regulations.
• The local decision making process was highlighted - does this still exist today? Note the BSL4 labs in Boston prompted some of the same local conversations re: NIMBY.
• Noted that it would be difficult to know how to respond to some of these questions today. Not 100% certain there is no risk; this isn't attainable. However, we don't personally have numbers to point to.

Feedback on Biosafety Project

We (i.e. Megan Palmer, Drew Endy, Natalie Kuldell and others) are planning to use this archival footage in a new project in biosafety education. The project is designed to inspire and enable the next generation of synthetic biologists to take leadership on issues of personal, public and environmental safety. We have envisioned beginning with a short video using three main elements: (1) historical context (2) contemporary framing and (3) tools and resources. Can you give us feedback as to what from this archival footage, or elsewhere, might be compelling to use in developing tools to teach critical analysis of issues around biosafety?

• Would be interesting to get the scientists involved (e.g. Jon King) to re-read the transcripts (on video) and reflect on how their viewpoint has changed.
• Hard to choose just a few sections.
• Would be valuable to contrast iGEM teams' questions around safety.
• Could contrast testimonies at the PCSBI.
• A particularly compelling clip is when Mark responds to the moratorium proposal by stating that this will halt research that no-one considers unsafe . How does the line between safe and unsafe get drawn?

2. Syn Bio Practices Leadership Bootcamp/Workshop Discussion & Planning

The BioBricks Foundation (BBF) is interested in co-sponsoring a spring/summer intensive 'bootcamp' course designed to teach and engage practitioners in the broader societal context of developments in synthetic biology and foster leadership in advancing responsible practices. 'Graduates' from the bootcamp would be invited to participate in subsequent workshops organized by the BBF focused more narrowly on topics such as IP, Standards, Ethics and Communications.

This evening, we will brainstorm and discuss (1) curriculum components (topics/case studies), (2) formats, and (3) deliverables (white papers etc) for the bootcamp . Our goal is to frame the proposal and divide it into sections we can pursue individually or in small groups. This is a great opportunity for us to work together on a concrete project that will help both us and others start to address the gaps we have explored during our previous meetings.

From your email responses, gaps lists, and previous discussions, I am collecting a growing seed list of ideas for the workshop on the wiki: http://openwetware.org/wiki/SBPWG:Discussion/Practices_Bootcamp

In preparation for Thursday, please: - review the wiki site (and edit at will!): http://openwetware.org/wiki/SBPWG:Discussion/Practices_Bootcamp - bring your ideas for preferred topics, case studies, invited guests and deliverables (as many as possible, the more non-obvious the better!)